Is it? As someone who witnessed the effects of psychotropic drugs on someone I'll say *some* do awful things to a persons mind and body, others do wonders. So should they not be used anymore? Ask those they help. I'd also like to point out that Jeffery Dahmer was violent as a child, pre-medication, as possibly were some of the others and my point, with or without those meds some of those people were likely to have been violent regardless. To blame one thing as the catalyst for violence isn't wise, nor realistic. The human mind is complex and diverse, with or without meds, especially a troubled mind. Certainly some medications can be lethal to some, but does that warrant eradicating them? Perhaps better education about their side effects, and with whom these side effects are more likely? I'm not sure what the answers are, but a rush to judgement about each case imo is naive. There are many things that factor into someone going off the deep end, to blame one only, again is naive.
There are many cases where dairy products and nuts have killed and nearly killed many people, food stores/restaurants list warnings about them, but they haven't eradicated them. Fact is, dairy is listed on Canada's food guide as a necessary food. My opinion it's a hazardous food, but some obviously think not.
I suppose we could also throw the gun laws into this argument. If there were no guns, then the mass shootings couldn't have been carried out. But where do we draw the lines, banning the instruments those of ill minds use? and do we then blame the meds we put them on, blame the parents, religious leaders, or blame the individuals themselves for being the cause of the incident?
